[ QUOTE ]
Gee, I can not think of why a Barrel maker would not just do anything they could to help you prolong the life of a barrel, what would be there possible motive? Barrel makers are not in the business of selling rifle barrels!

[/ QUOTE ]
Boo Hoo [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img] I really hoped to avoid this and just get good published data. The arguement is said daily about automobiles - they design them to wear out fast so you have to buy a new one. Clearly - reliability/usefullness differentiates products in a competitive field. I don't know any barrel manufactures besides Lilja - but I'm convinced the man is not only exceptionally competent but completely honest.

[ QUOTE ]
I do however have a bore-scope and can see the difference in the throats of the barrels that use moly and those that don't!

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't wish to debate but I will point out doing a reproducible study like the one Lilja quoted is non-trivial. You need to precisely match load, ambient temp, barrel temp then for good measure do a crossover study. Doing a study this way precludes dbl blind requirements because the measurements are objective and reproducible.

[ QUOTE ]

I think there is a easy way to find out for yourself for a cost of just a few thousand dollars. If you already have a rifle set-up for a switch barrel, and own a bore-scope, buy a pair of barrel blanks from a top barrel maker and have them chambered by your smith to the same chamber cut with the same reamer. Shoot the same loads in both (one barrel with moly the other without). Check each bore each time you clean with your bore scope while keeping records of the number of rounds fired in each barrel. Keep a watchful eye on the throats of both. Report back to us at the end of two thousand rounds fired in each barrel your observations.

[/ QUOTE ]

You forgot the [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] face [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
Good study design.
I would use 4 barrels (from the same batch) and do a crossover midway thru the study to minimize the vast number of variables in a finished barrel.

OK, I'm writing up the grant proposal and I'm stuck. HELP
[ QUOTE ]
Shoot the same loads in both (one barrel with moly the other without).

[/ QUOTE ]
But if we do this Moly will last longer because Moly causes the powder to burn slower and gives lower velocity. But you can achieve the same results (less heat/pressure/vel = longer barrel life) by just reducing the load without Moly.

So should we find the max Sammy Load that yields the same vel in each gun? What if barrel 1 (B1) has a high ES, vel Std Dev and B2 doesn't? How much does that count?

Moly changes the shape of the pressure curve and not every barrel likes Moly/Non-Moly

What if B1 and B2 have the same vel but because of the shape of the curve B2 has higher temp/pressure (assume the opposite can happen)(one shooting Moly, one not)

Can we assume all 8 barrels will have the same sweet spot?
My scout master said each gun has it's unique sweet spot, but then he never heard of a custom gun or the internet.

I only know what I've observed in my own barrels. We can debate this forever but until you have used both in some type of test, is all you are repeating is someone Else's theory. My proposal is a real world test, not a lab conditions test. How do you know that some barrels and not others like moly? Have you tested what you write and can say that this is true? I do not care what theories you support, what your beliefs are, it is unimportant. When the throat on a barrel looks like the back of a alligator you can be assured that it's days are numbered! Do you not know that a well put together rifle will shoot about anything you feed it and shoot well? Yes I've seen barrels that are pretty well gone produce good accuracy also! But this is not the debate, does it (moly) extend barrel life or not? Does moly reduce pressure or not? I have found both cases to be a yes. I don't care weather you agree or not. And THAT FOR ME ENDS THE DEBATE!

Gentlemen at the risk of sounding as a know it all, let me say this about molly; I have done several tests not only on molly but different grades and different application techniques. I have tested it on calibers from 155mm down to 14 cal. Firing thousands of rounds through barrels picked for their conformity and each barrel had instrumentation showing the pressure, temp, and vibration, I worked on a project for three years and what we found out was:
a) Pressure is reduced,
b) It holds its velocity for a longer period of time, actually moving faster at long range, over 300 meters, then a non coated round that was moving faster at the muzzle.
c) Throat life is extended ( I should qualify this by saying we were looking for a specific velocity at a specific range and were able to do this using molly coated rounds and still cut down the propellant charge which cut down on heat and pressure and the sand blasting effect of unburnt powder.)
d) Fouling was greatly reduced even on the 14 cal.
e) Mag. Primers work best with molly coated bullets.
f) Barrels stayed cooler longer
g) Molly coated rounds were more accurate when judged in 10 round groups and were more accurate in full auto fire.
h) Application was best when done using a tumbler with hardened steel ball bearings for s specific time.
I can also say that I use all molly coated bullets in all my firearms and I am totally anal retentive on their care. now donít get me started on cryo treatment and why barrels and any other part of a firearm should be treated.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
As far as <font color="red"> MOLY </font> coating goes, I say yes. It has more going for it than anyother thing I've seen to help reduce pressure and extend barrel life! [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]
As far as I can tell there is no definitive evidence on barrel life - only fouling and initial pressure.
Lilja cautions against using them for barrel break in and he also writes: [ QUOTE ]

<font color="purple"> at the risk of offending those that promote the use of moly, we can't see much benefit to it for a couple of reasons. </font>

I want to avoid a religious debate so I'm just looking for objective/reproducible data, not anecdotes or testimonies.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have spoke with many barrel makers about this. They agree with me that "if" you are going to shoot monolithic bullets, then chamber pressures will be an issue. With that, they agree that this is one of the viable uses for moly.

Remember, most if not all of the moly opinions pertain to lead cored bullets and I agree that there is not much use for it on lead core bullets. But, with monolithic bullets, it is a viable means to reduce pressure to acheive a useable velocity. The only question remains is will the moly coated Lost river bullets shoot as good as the GS customs that come with moly coating already applied.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Gee, I can not think of why a Barrel maker would not just do anything they could to help you prolong the life of a barrel, what would be there possible motive? Barrel makers are not in the business of selling rifle barrels!

[/ QUOTE ]
Boo Hoo [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img] I really hoped to avoid this and just get good published data. The arguement is said daily about automobiles - they design them to wear out fast so you have to buy a new one. Clearly - reliability/usefullness differentiates products in a competitive field. I don't know any barrel manufactures besides Lilja - but I'm convinced the man is not only exceptionally competent but completely honest.

[ QUOTE ]
I do however have a bore-scope and can see the difference in the throats of the barrels that use moly and those that don't!

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't wish to debate but I will point out doing a reproducible study like the one Lilja quoted is non-trivial. You need to precisely match load, ambient temp, barrel temp then for good measure do a crossover study. Doing a study this way precludes dbl blind requirements because the measurements are objective and reproducible.

[ QUOTE ]

I think there is a easy way to find out for yourself for a cost of just a few thousand dollars. If you already have a rifle set-up for a switch barrel, and own a bore-scope, buy a pair of barrel blanks from a top barrel maker and have them chambered by your smith to the same chamber cut with the same reamer. Shoot the same loads in both (one barrel with moly the other without). Check each bore each time you clean with your bore scope while keeping records of the number of rounds fired in each barrel. Keep a watchful eye on the throats of both. Report back to us at the end of two thousand rounds fired in each barrel your observations.

[/ QUOTE ]

You forgot the [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] face [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
Good study design.
I would use 4 barrels (from the same batch) and do a crossover midway thru the study to minimize the vast number of variables in a finished barrel.

Here is a far better idea! Take a straight tube barrel and have both ends chambered and threaded. This way you can "cross over" with the exact same barrel and actually use the same piece of steel for your research. And, since you are doing this for pure research, the barrel crown will be of little value. [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[ QUOTE ]
My scout master said each gun has it's unique sweet spot, but then he never heard of a custom gun or the internet.

[/ QUOTE ]

This topic is moving in the direction of being a very "big bore" to read vice getting the information I requested. It is best not to treat newbies as rookies. They are not the same.

Moly will reduce pressures, Moly will allow for speed increases. For a pure hunting rifle (one that gets shot only about 50 times per year) I am not that interested in the throat life as much as the most speed I can get and keep the accuracy in the .25 moa area. My hunting rifles (all 4 sport custom actions, stocks and barrels) are for hunting only. My three competition rifles (all three sport custom actions, stocks and barrels) (oops, 4, forgot the McMillan benchrest 50 cal) get shot a lot, but I use naked bullets since they are lead cored. We only shoot the barrels about 2000 rounds and then use them for tomato stakes or hunting barrels for bolt pistols.

So, with all that behind me, I am still seeking the flatest trajectory in a .308 bullet for use in a 1000 yard hunting rifle. Maybe even farther if I extend the food plots out some but I want to conquer 1000 yards first. Specifically, I and am looking for the bullet to load in my 26" Hall repeater so I can achieve the flattest trajectory to maximize the long-range potential of this rifle and my other 30" barrel already chambered for the rifle is not an option!

I think that the 169 or the 180 Wildcats (which are supposed to be somewhat long) will work in both the single shots (30/338 Lapua and the other Hall with the 34" Kreiger in 30/338 Lapua Improved).